WASHINGTON - Twice convicted of felonies, James Francis Barton Jr. faces charges of violating a federal law barring felons from owning guns after police found seven pistols, three shotguns and five rifles at his home south of Pittsburgh.

As a defense, Barton and several other defendants in federal gun cases argue that last month's Supreme Court ruling allows them to keep loaded handguns at home for self-defense.

"The Court’s opinion should not be taken to castdoubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms byfelons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearmsin sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, orlaws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale ofarms."

From Volokh:"Many felons may need self defense more than you and I, but the government has extra justification for limiting that right because they have proven themselves to be untrustworthy," Volokh said.

While some will argue that not all felonies are equal, and that's true, this isn't a case of "self-defense". Had he had one or two guns, that might be legit. He had 15.

Over on that heap known as HuffPo, the usual suspects are still trying to push the "Collective Rights" hypothesis using partial quotes from the Congressional Records. Here's a recent one:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Thus this "necessary security" is not only recognized but guarded and protected." (Rep. Morris S. Miller, of New York, in debate in the House, December 8, 1814)

One would think that Rep Miller was saying that the 2A only had to do w/ the militia. That is unless one read the entire speech which runs about 24 pages in length*.

The debate itself was over a proposal for universal conscription into the general Army of which Miller was opposed. Shortly after the above quote, he asks this question:

Now I should like to know, whether the military population of the country is not the militia of the states?

He then goes on to state that a universal conscription would not only diminish the State Militias but would be "A daring violation of the rights of this people".

So once again. The people are the militia. A right inherent and recognized by the Constitution.

Friday, July 18, 2008

Fairfax, VA. – Today the Village of Morton Grove moved to avoid imminent legal action by the National Rifle Association by amending its Village Code to remove the current handgun ban and incorporate sections of the Illinois Criminal Code.

“We are pleased that the Village of Morton Grove took steps to repeal its draconian gun ban,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist. “Finally Village residents can exercise the same constitutionally-protected rights that the rest of the country enjoys.”

Final action by the Village of Morton Grove Board on this ordinance is expected at the July 28 meeting. The NRA is committed to restoring the individual Second Amendment rights to all law-abiding Americans, as recently recognized by the United States Supreme Court in Heller v. District of Columbia.

Cox concluded, “On behalf of the tens of thousands of NRA members and gun owners in Illinois, I’d like to thank all of those who dedicated their time to seeing this illegal gun ban repealed.”

if the current murder rate holds in the city, 2008 may end with fewer than 500 homicides and that it is expected to be one of the least deadly years in the city in the last 40 years.

Three things.

1. 40 years ago was 13 years BEFORE the ban. So for a period of 25 years, it didn't do squat w/ Chicago being the murder capitol of the US more than once. That is, unless they want to argue that things would have been WORSE w/o the ban.

2. "fewer than 500 homicides"? True. One fewer.

3. "If the current murder rate holds"? From January through March, the rate had dropped 1.1%. Through April it shot up to an INCREASE of 8.9%. (So really a 10% increase in a month). May went up to 12.7% and June 12.8%. Yay! it only increased another .1%. That gives them the ability to say it's "remaining flat". But only in the comparison to the month before.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

"We're obviously not going to turn away help on a front as important as this," (Spokesperson) Heard said. "At the same time, we're a little puzzled about how it would work. It's unprecedented. Obviously, help in the form of reducing the number of guns on the street go a long way to addressing the problem."

This is in response to the Blago's suggestion of moving State Police and possibly Nat'l Guard Units into the city to help combat the recent rise in crime.

Maybe they should focus on reducing the number of criminals on the streets since 90% of murders are committed by prior criminals. But that wouldn't mesh w/ Daley and Blago's citizen disarmament plans.

Armed and Safe notes that our favorite Reverend, "Snuffy" Pfleger, has put a $5000 bounty on what he describes as "Gun Runners". Being that he considers anyone in the firearm business as a "Gun Runner", one wonders how many bounties he will have to pay out.

As usual, he's put the cart before the horse. To wit:

"We have to create an atmosphere where people are afraid to do crimes because they understand the community sees them as an enemy. Until we create that, people think they can get by with it. It's not acceptable," said Fr. Michael Pfleger, St. Sabina Church.

Here's the thing Snuff. The real criminals you want the community to see as the enemy are part of the community. They are the sons, daughters, friends, uncles, etc. of the people who are not turning them in now. The 'community' is wearing "Stop Snitchin' " shirts in courtrooms to keep people from testifying. The 'community' is telling the police they didn't see a thing when crimes are committed on their streets. They're not going to start turning them in because you've offered them a measly five grand. That's not worth their life. Really. Look at how many mothers you see on TV crying out about their "good boys" being killed when they were lifelong criminals with a record a mile long?

Be honest w/ yourself. You're not going to go after "gun runners", "straw purchasers", or anyone else who is committing actual crimes in your 'community'. You're going to continue to harass legitimate businesses and haranguing about the evils of guns. Just like your buddy Rev. Jackson.

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

I have a simple message to everyone who is applauding the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding the 2nd Amendment: I am perfectly willing to not only let you have a gun but as many guns as you want. There's just one catch. You must prove to me, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that you are a member of "a well-regulated militia," as provided by the full wording of the 2nd Amendment. If you cannot, or will not, do this, then you do not get to have a gun.

That is the best solution in the world.

—Steve Herr

Well first of all the author shows he didn't read the ruling beyond what the newspaper told him. The Supreme Court stated that firearm ownership was independent of militia membership. You know, that whole "Right of the People" part that YOU ignored.

Second, Federal law states that the majority of males are already members of the militia as well as the Illinois State Constitution. So much for you passing your High School Constitution class.

Third, why must I "prove to you" anything you arrogant prick? Perhaps you should have proven that you had a glimmer of basic education before you put crayon to paper.

And morons like this assist in deciding the future of this nation.

And to note, there are two more anti-gun letters printed on the same day. But the Trib isn't pushing an agenda, right?

Mr. Robinson is joining w/ the ACLU to try and get rid of the list because of it's obvious attack on the rights of American citizens. Think they recognize the irony of that in lieu of their recent position on the 2A?

They do have a token minority pro-gun editorialist on their payroll. Steve Chapman is graciously allowed to post his pieces showing that antigun research is based mostly on fraud.

As it turns out, the claims about guns and suicide don't stand up well to scrutiny. A 2004 report by the National Academy of Sciences was doubtful, noting that the alleged association is small and may be illusory...

The National Academy of Sciences report noted that any link between firearms and suicides "is not found in comparisons across countries." The number of guns in a nation tells you nothing about its suicide rate.

So yes, areas w/ high firearm ownership will have higher numbers of firearm suicides but not necessarily suicides overall. While some high ownership US states have higher suicide rates than low ownership states, numerous low ownership countries (Most of Europe, Russia, and Japan) have much higher suicide rates than the US and rates in Australia remained steady for years even after their gun confiscations.

But we won't hear about that. All we'll hear about from the 'Mainstream Media' is the alleged suicide reduction in DC after the ban.

The Chicago Tribune called for the repealing of the 2nd amendment and completely ignored the hundreds of people that showed up at the Pro-rights rally on July 11th. 2500 people rallying in Springfield was not considered "newsworthy".

But when anti-gun rallies are held w/ a "few hundred" people, it's front page news. 15 yr old gang bangers are referred to as "CPS students" to garner sympathy instead of asking why they were outside on a school night at 2am with a gun.